Personal Proximity and Reactions to Terrorism

Abstract

In a panel study where one survey was conducted immediately after a terrorist attack in central Stockholm, with over 20,000 participants, we examine the possibility that first-hand experiences with terror increases effects compared to people located elsewhere in Sweden. We use matching and as-if random variation in our data to identify the effect of personal proximity. While we find that people close to the attack perceived themselves as more affected, attesting to the vividness of the experience, we find no evidence of stronger rally effects, greater outgroup dislike, preferences for security policies or emotional effects. The results challenge previous theories on public opinion change in the aftermath of vivid events. In line with prior research, however, the results indicate that public opinion among people across Sweden did change on a range of issues. These general effects occurred uniformly, regardless of geographic location in the country.

Cross-Border Impacts of Terrorist Attacks and the Importance of Proximity

“…Importantly, this result corresponds with findings of other scholars (e.g., Berezin & Díez-Medrano, 2008;Koopmans & Vliegenthart, 2011;Rytter, 2010;Yang & Chen, 2019). Third, our analyses also indicate that primarily focusing on geographical distance (as in Agerberg & Sohlberg, 2021;Böhmelt et al, 2020;Bove et al, 2021;Braithwaite, 2013;Huddy et al, 2005) is not sufficient for understanding why the cross-border impacts of terrorist attacks on foreign soil diverge. Rather, our thematic content analysis suggests that a broader conception of distancewhich also includes cultural, historical, and emotional distance (e.g., Berezin & Díez-Medrano, 2008;Koopmans & Vliegenthart, 2011;Rytter, 2010;Yang & Chen, 2019)is necessary to account for these varying cross-border impacts.…”

“…As noted in the theoretical framework, there have already been several studies that consider geographical distance when researching the (cross-border) impact of terrorist attacks (e.g., Agerberg & Sohlberg, 2021;Böhmelt et al, 2020;Braithwaite, 2013;Huddy et al, 2005). However, our results indicate that this type of distance cannot account for all the variation in the cross-border impacts of the six attacks.…”

“…A large number of scholars, for example, investigated the psychological, political, and behavioural impacts of 9/11 in the US (e.g., Birkland, 2004;Gigerenzer, 2006;Huddy & Feldman, 2011;Huddy, Feldman, Capelos & Provost, 2002;Schuster et al, 2001). Comparable studies have also been carried out on the impacts of terrorist attacks in Israel (Getmansky & Zeitzoff, 2014;Ronen, Rahav & Appel, 2003), Spain (Bali, 2007;Echebarria-Echabe & 3 Fernández-Guede, 2006), Sweden (Agerberg & Sohlberg, 2021), and Turkey (Aytaç & Çarkoğlu, 2019). However, these studies all focus on the social and political impacts of terrorist attacks within the countries in which the attack took place.…”

“…Overall, previous research has predominantly used survey data to measure a terrorist attack's (cross-border) impacts, for instance by investigating whether it led to an increase in antiimmigrant sentiment among respondents (Agerberg & Sohlberg, 2021;Böhmelt et al, 2020;Castanho Silva, 2018;Finseraas & Listhaug, 2013;Legewie, 2013). We, on the other hand, specifically focus on the impact that an attack has on a country's public debates about domestic affairs.…”

Tillit etter terror i Norge, Frankrike og Spania. Betydningen av narrativer og politisk kontekst

“…23. Ferske studier finner ikke noen sammenheng mellom det å oppleve et angrep på naert hold og politisk tillit (Agerberg & Sohlberg, 2021). Det virker altså ikke å vaere slik at de politiske konsekvensene av terror er større for de som oppholder seg i naerheten av et angrep.…”